tiltbillings wrote:When that passage is taken in its fuller context, you cannot say this: "The life of an enlightened being is impermanent, and so in that light it is also a form of dukkha - albeit a very subtle one," unless you are stating that an arahant is still regarding the khandhas in terms of delusional self.

Hi tilt,

I would appreciate if you could clarify your view a bit further. Obviously I don't see it that way, so I can only guess to what your point is.

You seem to be suggesting that an arahant still has dukkha, but then never mind the 3rd Noble Truth that states that dukkha has been stopped. Either awakening is being free of dukkha or it is not. I would simply state as does the text in question when one no longer regards the khandhas in terms of self, there is no dukkha, no matter how much the khandhas may or may not change. Keep in mind that awakening is freedom from grasping after what changes in terms of self, pushing away what changes in terms of self, or regarding any aspect of one's experience as being a self. The dukkha of the changing khandhas is in the misapprehension of them. Seeing the khandhas correctly one is liberated. Liberated from what? See the 3rd Noble Truth.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

tiltbillings wrote:When that passage is taken in its fuller context, you cannot say this: "The life of an enlightened being is impermanent, and so in that light it is also a form of dukkha - albeit a very subtle one," unless you are stating that an arahant is still regarding the khandhas in terms of delusional self.

Hi tilt,

I'm not saying an arahant has dukkha as that would define some thing that is the arahant that

I would appreciate if you could clarify your view a bit further. Obviously I don't see it that way, so I can only guess to what your point is.

You seem to be suggesting that an arahant still has dukkha, but then never mind the 3rd Noble Truth that states that dukkha has been stopped. Either awakening is being free of dukkha or it is not. I would simply state as does the text in question when one no longer regards the khandhas in terms of self, there is no dukkha, no matter how much the khandhas may or may not change. Keep in mind that awakening is freedom from grasping after what changes in terms of self, pushing away what changes in terms of self, or regarding any aspect of one's experience as being a self. The dukkha of the changing khandhas is in the misapprehension of them. Seeing the khandhas correctly one is liberated. Liberated from what? See the 3rd Noble Truth.

Hi tilt,

I think it is important to look at all the noble truths and not just one. Looking at the noble truth of suffering it states:

"Now this, monks, is the noble truth of stress: Birth is stressful, aging is stressful, death is stressful; sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are stressful; association with the unbeloved is stressful, separation from the loved is stressful, not getting what is wanted is stressful. In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stressful."

Here (and as far as I know, nowhere else) suffering is not defined as having a view of self. If that was to define dukkha, than surely the Buddha would have said it here. Instead he quite plainly says aging and death, an obvious form of impermanence, are dukkha. Also in the anatta sutta I quoted before the link is as follows: impermanence -> suffering. It is not as you seem to imply: view of self -> suffering.

So to come to the 3rd noble truth, in my understanding it says the cessation of craving leads to the cessation of stress. The word 'cessation' I think is a good translation here as it implies a process. So also here the link is not instant. If we put the 3rd noble truth into its fuller form of dependent cessation this may be a bit more obvious again by the link "aging and death" not having ended, and the words "from the cessation of this comes the cessation of that".

Also, if a view of self in the aggregates would equate or lead to suffering than one with right view (sotapanna) would already have made an ended to suffering, but this is not so. It is "the craving that makes for further becoming" (second noble truth) that leads to suffering.

tiltbillings wrote:Either awakening is being free of dukkha or it is not.

It's not that black and white. The Buddha described two Nibbana properties.

And what is the Unbinding property with fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is an arahant whose fermentations have ended, who has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, ended the fetter of becoming, and is released through right gnosis. His five sense faculties still remain and, owing to their being intact, he is cognizant of the agreeable & the disagreeable, and is sensitive to pleasure & pain. His ending of passion, aversion, & delusion is termed the Unbinding property with fuel remaining.[1]

And what is the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is an arahant whose fermentations have ended, who has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, ended the fetter of becoming, and is released through right gnosis. For him, all that is sensed, being unrelished, will grow cold right here. This is termed the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining."[2]

These two proclaimed by the one with vision,Unbinding properties the one independent, the one who is Such:[3] one property, here in this lifewith fuel remaining from the destruction of the guide to becoming,and that with no fuel remaining, after this life,in which all becoming totally ceases.

reflection wrote:Also in the anatta sutta I quoted before the link is as follows: impermanence -> suffering.

And even more flatly stated here.

These three feelings have been spoken of by me: a feeling of pleasure, a feeling of pain, & a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain. These are the three feelings spoken of by me. But I have also said: 'Whatever is felt comes under stress.' That I have stated simply in connection with the inconstancy of fabrications. That I have stated simply in connection with the nature of fabrications to end... in connection with the nature of fabrications to fall away... to fade away... to cease... in connection with the nature of fabrications to change.

It must, of course, be remembered that phassanirodha in the arahat does not mean that experience as such (pañcakkhandhā) is at an end. But, also, there is no experience without phassa. In other words, to the extent that we can still speak of an eye, of forms, and of eye-consciousness (seeing)—e.g. Samvijjati kho āvuso Bhagavato cakkhu, passati Bhagavā cakkhunā rūpam, chandarāgo Bhagavato n'atthi, suvimuttacitto Bhagavā ('The Auspicious One, friend, possesses an eye; the Auspicious One sees visible forms with the eye; desire-&-lust for the Auspicious One there is not; the Auspicious One is wholly freed in heart (citta)' (Cf. ATTĀ [c].)) (Salāyatana Samy. xviii,5 <S.iv,164>)—to that extent we can still speak of phassa. But it must no longer be regarded as contact with me (or with him, or with somebody). There is, and there is not, contact in the case of the arahat, just as there is, and there is not, consciousness.

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

It must, of course, be remembered that phassanirodha in the arahat does not mean that experience as such (pañcakkhandhā) is at an end. But, also, there is no experience without phassa. In other words, to the extent that we can still speak of an eye, of forms, and of eye-consciousness (seeing)—e.g. Samvijjati kho āvuso Bhagavato cakkhu, passati Bhagavā cakkhunā rūpam, chandarāgo Bhagavato n'atthi, suvimuttacitto Bhagavā ('The Auspicious One, friend, possesses an eye; the Auspicious One sees visible forms with the eye; desire-&-lust for the Auspicious One there is not; the Auspicious One is wholly freed in heart (citta)' (Cf. ATTĀ [c].)) (Salāyatana Samy. xviii,5 <S.iv,164>)—to that extent we can still speak of phassa. But it must no longer be regarded as contact with me (or with him, or with somebody). There is, and there is not, contact in the case of the arahat, just as there is, and there is not, consciousness.

Well we have interpretations, and then we have this:

His five sense faculties still remain and, owing to their being intact, he is cognizant of the agreeable & the disagreeable, and is sensitive to pleasure & pain.

As to the "relationship," so to speak, of the Arahant to dukkha (does the Arahant still "have" dukkha, or what?") it was described in the Arrow Sutta like this:

tiltbillings wrote:Either awakening is being free of dukkha or it is not.

It's not that black and white. The Buddha described two Nibbana properties.

Either one is freed from -- no longer conditioned by and no longer generating conditioning based on -- greed, hatred and delusion, or one is not. This not a "wait until death" thing. Such an awakened individual can have physical pain, but such an individual is no longer subject to the conditioned dukkha of wanting what reinforces the sense of self, such an individual is no longer subject to the conditioned dukkha of trying to push away that which threatens the sense of self, and such an individual is no longer subject to the conditioned dukkha based upon the fuel of the delusion that we are truly are at our core an unchanging agent/self.

"Then, Malunkyaputta, with regard to phenomena to be seen, heard, sensed, or cognized: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Malunkyaputta, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress."

tiltbillings wrote:Either one is freed from -- no longer conditioned by and no longer generating conditioning based on -- greed, hatred and delusion, or one is not. This not a "wait until death" thing. Such an awakened individual can have physical pain, but such an individual is no longer subject to the conditioned dukkha of wanting what reinforces the sense of self, such an individual is no longer subject to the conditioned dukkha of trying to push away that which threatens the sense of self, and such an individual is no longer subject to the conditioned dukkha based upon the fuel of the delusion that we are truly are at our core an unchanging agent/self.

You are just repeating what you said earlier, without acknowledging the Two Nibbana elements. The "end of stress" quoted below, refers to the first.

"Then, Malunkyaputta, with regard to phenomena to be seen, heard, sensed, or cognized: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Malunkyaputta, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress."

What exactly does "disjoined" means?Does it mean that one still experiences suffering & stress but doesn't consider it to be his. orOne does not feel suffering and stress at all.

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

reflection wrote:Also, if a view of self in the aggregates would equate or lead to suffering than one with right view (sotapanna) would already have made an ended to suffering, but this is not so. It is "the craving that makes for further becoming" (second noble truth) that leads to suffering.

(lit.: 'I am'-conceit), 'ego-conceit', may range from the coarsest pride and self-assertion to a subtle feeling of one's distinctiveness or superiority that persists, as the 8th fetter (samyojana, q.v.), until the attainment of Arahatship or Holiness.

It is based upon the comparison of oneself with others, and may, therefore, manifest itself also as a feeling of inferiority or the claim to be equal (s. māna).

It has to be distinguished from 'ego-belief' (sakkāya-ditthi, q.v.) which implies a definite belief or view (ditthi) concerning the assumption of a self or soul, and, being the 1st of the fetters, disappears at attainment of Stream-Entry (sotāpatti; s. ariya-puggala).

"Even when the five lower fetters have vanished in a noble disciple, there is still in him, with regard to the five groups of clinging, a slight undiscarded measure of the conceit 'I am', of the will 'I am', of the proclivity 'I am' " (S . XXII, 89) -- http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/a/asmi_maana.htm

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

No it doesn't. You said "there is no dukkha" yet you acknowledge the arahant feels physical pain, which is dukkha.

Physical pain is not the "dukkha" from which the living arahant is released. Given that I have carefully drawn out what I mean, the sutta clearly makes my point. The only dukkha that really matters in terms of liberation, in terms of Dhamma practice, the only dukkha Dhamma practice actually addresses is that which is grounded in measuring factors greed, hatred, and delusion.

Living or dead, the tathagata/arahant is beyond the measure, and as Malunkyaputta Sutta/Bahiya sutta states dukkha has ended, but do keep in mind what the context of how this is said.

This statement: "The life of an enlightened being is impermanent, and so in that light it is also a form of dukkha - albeit a very subtle one," is not appropriate. It is measuring the arahant/tathagata.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

reflection wrote:Also, if a view of self in the aggregates would equate or lead to suffering than one with right view (sotapanna) would already have made an ended to suffering, but this is not so. It is "the craving that makes for further becoming" (second noble truth) that leads to suffering.

(lit.: 'I am'-conceit), 'ego-conceit', may range from the coarsest pride and self-assertion to a subtle feeling of one's distinctiveness or superiority that persists, as the 8th fetter (samyojana, q.v.), until the attainment of Arahatship or Holiness.

It is based upon the comparison of oneself with others, and may, therefore, manifest itself also as a feeling of inferiority or the claim to be equal (s. māna).

It has to be distinguished from 'ego-belief' (sakkāya-ditthi, q.v.) which implies a definite belief or view (ditthi) concerning the assumption of a self or soul, and, being the 1st of the fetters, disappears at attainment of Stream-Entry (sotāpatti; s. ariya-puggala).

"Even when the five lower fetters have vanished in a noble disciple, there is still in him, with regard to the five groups of clinging, a slight undiscarded measure of the conceit 'I am', of the will 'I am', of the proclivity 'I am' " (S . XXII, 89) -- http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/a/asmi_maana.htm

I didn't forget it, but this is not self view (taking the aggregates as self), this is conceit. But it doesn't touch the points I've made as conceit is also not the direct origin of suffering. Dependent origination is very clear on this: the direct source of suffering is birth, based on craving. It says it 100's of times in the suttas. Also, I don't see why we should deny the first noble truth when it clearly defines suffering, saying nothing about conceit. Instead it says old age and death are suffering - clearly a result of birth and clearly not ended for arahants either.

However, this is all venturing quite far from the discussion I had with nowheat, and I think discussing the experience after awakening is not all that important and certainly not very fruitful, so I will leave this discussion for now. I'll just leave saying I think it's more important to see what the thoughts do to us: existing with or without suffering, do we take that position out of faith, knowledge or perhaps out of desire for it? This we all have to ask for ourselves.

Last edited by reflection on Thu Jul 18, 2013 4:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

reflection wrote:I didn't forget it, but this is not self view (taking the aggregates as self), this is conceit.

It is more than just a "conceit," a rather weak word as it is commonly used for what is at play here. The sense of "I am" -- derived from the khandhas -- clearly is what underlies the sense of self. The "conceit" is more subtle and obviously more difficult to remove.

But it doesn't touch the points I've made as conceit is also not the direct origin of suffering. Dependent origination is very clear on this: the source of suffering is birth. It says it 100's of times in the suttas. Now I don't know how many times it says conceit is the origin of suffering, but I'm guessing none. Also, I don't see why we should deny the first noble truth when it clearly defines suffering, saying nothing about conceit.

It depends upon which particular model put forth in the suttas you choose to look at. There are numerous ways of talking about all of this. Using the Malunkyaputta Sutta model, my point still stands. I am certainly not denying the 1st Noble Truth, and keep in mind until there is full awakening the khandhas are five groups of clinging and "I am" is very much a part of that.

enlightenment without suffering, do we take that position out of faith, knowledge or perhaps out of desire for it? This we all have to ask for ourselves.

Awakening by definition is the end of suffering, as the Bahiya/Malunkyaputta Suttas (among many others) show. The problem is not distinguishing among the various uses of dukkha in the suttas, which leads to your mistake.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

reflection wrote: Also in the anatta sutta I quoted before the link is as follows: impermanence -> suffering. It is not as you seem to imply: view of self -> suffering.

The implications is there in the Anattalakkhana Sutta, and here, MN 22, it is a bit more carefully spelled out:

"You may well accept, monks, the assumption of a self-theory from the acceptance of which there would not arise sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief, and despair. (But) do you see, monks, any such assumption of a self-theory?" — "No, Lord." — "Well, monks, I, too, do not see any such assumption of a self-theory from the acceptance of which there would not arise sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and despair."

"So, bhikkhus any kind of form whatever, whether past, future or presently arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or external, whether inferior or superior, whether far or near, must with right understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.'

"Any kind of feeling whatever...

"Any kind of perception whatever...

"Any kind of determination whatever...

"Any kind of consciousness whatever, whether past, future or presently arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or external, whether inferior or superior, whether far or near must, with right understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self.'

"Bhikkhus, when a noble follower who has heard (the truth) sees thus, he finds estrangement in form, he finds estrangement in feeling, he finds estrangement in perception, he finds estrangement in determinations, he finds estrangement in consciousness.

"When he finds estrangement, passion fades out. With the fading of passion, he is liberated. When liberated, there is knowledge that he is liberated. He understands: 'Birth is exhausted, the holy life has been lived out, what can be done is done, of this there is no more beyond.'"